Dr Saab, presenting quotes from 200-300 years before partition should not be used as evidence for why partition was necessary.
Muslims conquered India so were looked upon as foreign invaders.
It is historic fact that some muslim rulers were only interested in land grabbing, empire making, as well as clamping down violently on dissension amongst the Hindu majority; law of jungle to keep power for the minority ruler over majority non muslim ruled population. Any ruler/empire that violates human rights is doomed to failure.
We can therefore sympathise with individuals who wanted 'freedom'.
Should we see partition as a necessary evil since the Hindus could not be trusted to rule over the minority muslim fairly, just like they had not been ruled over fairly?
The British were and still are experts at divide and conquer so increased animosity between the two peoples when they took over; hence needing separation.
Jinnah originally wanted a single state with guarantees for muslims but the Hindus could not be trusted so partition was inevitable.